# imbalance in H-Energy

 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 October 28, 2006, 15:23 imbalance in H-Energy #1 cmete Guest   Posts: n/a Hi, in my results except the H-Energy all other imbalances are nearly zero. but imbalance of H-Energy is very high and converge of H-Energy is slow than others. do these reasons show wrong the heat tranfer setup? regards cmete

 October 30, 2006, 09:08 Re: imbalance in H-Energy #2 Robin Guest   Posts: n/a Try increasing the timestep on the energy equation (CFX-Pre, Solver Control > Advanced). If you have a very slow energy transport process such as conduction through your fluid (as opposed to convection), the energy timescale can be quite large. Setting the timestep of your energy equation to 10x or 100x larger than the fluid timescale can speed things up significantly. Also, if your fluid properties are not temperature dependant and the hydrodynamic equations have already converged, consider turning off the solution of fluids by setting the following expert parameters: solve fluids = f solve turbulence = f You will find these in the expert parameters panel in Pre. Regards, Robin

 November 2, 2006, 16:37 Re: imbalance in H-Energy #3 cmete Guest   Posts: n/a I thank you, your advice about setting the timestep of y energy equation to 10x or 100x larger than the fluid timescale was come good for H-energy converge speed. I did not select inc. viscous work term in Heat ransfer menu. could been that option selected for good converge? again i thank you. best regards. cmete

 November 3, 2006, 10:03 Re: imbalance in H-Energy #4 TobiasZ Guest   Posts: n/a Hi Robin, I saw your comment on h-energy imbalances in solids when simulating an adjacent air domain. How about transient simulations? It is normally not possible to set a different time step for solid and fluid. In my case, a free convection flow in a room enclosed by solids, high T-energy imbalances (up to value 2-10)occured in some solids (particular in the horizontal top and bottom located solids) and low h-energy imbalances in the fluid. I believe the imbalance occurs because of the different thermal time constants of the solids and the fluid on one hand and on the GGI interface on the other hand (surface mesh at interfaces are not 1:1). Is it OK to neglect the energy imbalance, if the other convergence criteria e.g. RMS=1e-5 are met? Thanks in advance for your help. Regards Tobias

 November 6, 2006, 09:27 Re: imbalance in H-Energy #5 Robin Guest   Posts: n/a Hi Tobiax, The requirements for convergence are different in a transient simulation. It becomes importatant to converge the residuals within a timestep (this time including the transient term in the residual calcualtion), but it is no longer important to reduce global imbalances. This is not because global imbalances are unimportant, but rather because what you are trying to do is resolve the transient behavior accurately. The difficulty with a transient CHT calculation is that the solid timescale is so much larger than the fluid timescale. To resolve the fluid behavior accurately, you must take a small timestep, but you still have to run for a long period of time to heat up your solid. The imbalance in your solid is simply indicating that it is still heating up (since the difference between what goes in and what goes out is what is accumulating in the domain). If your fluid flow is nearly steady state, you can probably get away with a large timestep for your whole simulation. Better still, if the fluid temperature only changes slightly, you can assume constant properties relative to the temperature. In such a case it would be reasonable to solve a steady state flow and freeze this for the duration of your transient simulation. You would do this by initializing your transient simulation with the steady state solution and set the expert parameter 'solve fluids = f' and 'solve turbulence = f', leaving energy on. Your flow field would remain unchanged and you would only need to solve the energy equation, which is much cheaper, and you could use a large timestep. Regards, Robin

 November 6, 2006, 10:38 Re: imbalance in H-Energy #6 TobiasZ Guest   Posts: n/a Robin, > The imbalance in your solid is simply indicating that it is : still heating up (since the difference between what goes in : and what goes out is what is accumulating in the domain). this was exactly what I hoped to hear If I understand it correctly, this means that it is OK having some imbalance in a solid domain (with high thermal mass) when going to the next time step since the imbalance does not show numerical error but only the process of heating up due to the capacity. Correct? Thank you for your kind help, Robin. Kind regards Tobias

 November 6, 2006, 15:02 Re: imbalance in H-Energy #7 Robin Guest   Posts: n/a Hi Tobias, This is exactly right. The control volume equations include flux terms for quantities flowing into and out of a control volume and a transient term, which accounts for the accumulation within a control volume. If the equations are solved correctly, these should balance out, i.e. what goes in should be equal to what goes out plus what accumulates. The residual is obtained by taking the sum of all three of these. If the equations are not fully solve, the residual is not zero. At steady state the transient term should go to zero and therefore the fluxes should balance out themselves. So in a steady state calculation, CFX does not include the transient term in the residual. In a transient simulation, it is important to ensure the equations solved within a timestep accurately represent the transient evolution of the control volume. In this case the residual does include the transient term, because how the control volume changes is important. This is why you can converge within a timestep in a transient simulation and why the residuals are different than in a steady state. Regards, Robin

 November 7, 2006, 02:33 Re: imbalance in H-Energy #8 TobiasZ Guest   Posts: n/a Robin, Excellent. Thank you again! Kind regards Tobias

September 5, 2012, 05:01
question
#9
Senior Member

Safia
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Rep Power: 6
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Robin ;79037 Hi Tobiax, The requirements for convergence are different in a transient simulation. It becomes importatant to converge the residuals within a timestep (this time including the transient term in the residual calcualtion), but it is no longer important to reduce global imbalances. This is not because global imbalances are unimportant, but rather because what you are trying to do is resolve the transient behavior accurately. The difficulty with a transient CHT calculation is that the solid timescale is so much larger than the fluid timescale. To resolve the fluid behavior accurately, you must take a small timestep, but you still have to run for a long period of time to heat up your solid. The imbalance in your solid is simply indicating that it is still heating up (since the difference between what goes in and what goes out is what is accumulating in the domain). If your fluid flow is nearly steady state, you can probably get away with a large timestep for your whole simulation. Better still, if the fluid temperature only changes slightly, you can assume constant properties relative to the temperature. In such a case it would be reasonable to solve a steady state flow and freeze this for the duration of your transient simulation. You would do this by initializing your transient simulation with the steady state solution and set the expert parameter 'solve fluids = f' and 'solve turbulence = f', leaving energy on. Your flow field would remain unchanged and you would only need to solve the energy equation, which is much cheaper, and you could use a large timestep. Regards, Robin
Hi Robin,,
After the energy equation is convergenace how I can get my overall solution. I mean the flow field solution and enrgy solution.
Best Regards
CFD user

 September 5, 2012, 06:07 #10 Super Moderator   Glenn Horrocks Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 10,665 Rep Power: 84 Robin has not been sighted on this forum for years. My preferred method of getting CHT simulations to convergence is by using a solid time scale factor. For typical air/steel systems (for example) a time scale factor of 1000 would be a good starting point. Your comment suggests you have miunderstood robin's comment. You only freeze the fluids equation after it is converged.

September 7, 2012, 04:43
#11
Senior Member

Safia
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Rep Power: 6
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ghorrocks Robin has not been sighted on this forum for years. My preferred method of getting CHT simulations to convergence is by using a solid time scale factor. For typical air/steel systems (for example) a time scale factor of 1000 would be a good starting point. Your comment suggests you have miunderstood robin's comment. You only freeze the fluids equation after it is converged.
Hi again
yes, I did it after I post my question.
Actually, the fluid field solution is remained and has been used to complate the convergance for energy equation within solid domain. After, it get convergance, the complete solution will be together within res file.
great hint
Bye

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post abhik.banerjee FLUENT 0 December 22, 2010 09:36 seojaho CFX 4 June 15, 2009 16:56 yunhee CFX 6 February 25, 2008 10:56 Asghari FLUENT 0 January 12, 2007 03:22 Coriolius CFX 4 November 5, 2004 23:29

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:55.